Month: September 2023

In a week where many people, incuding me, were spending our time moaning about how this year’s version on Justin Fields looked exactly like last year’s version of Justin Fields on Sunday, I thought that it was notable that my two favorite writers in town, Brad Biggs and Kevin Fishbain, both chose to address the deficiencies of the Bears defense instead here and here.

This is logical. The offense probably is what it is going to be with Fields at the helm. It’s going to go as he is going to go and if he doesn’t find a way to be better from the pocket, it is probably only going to get so much better.

A couple points.

• The defensive backfield, which was supposed to be the strength of this team, was a huge disappointment on Sunday. I think we can all agree on that. But it was encouraging to me that many of the issues that I saw were correctable. The Bears looked to me like they had a lot of communication breakdowns and broken coverages in key spots during the game and that led to some wide open receivers and some big plays. But these issues can be dealt with and, even with a reasonably big hole at nickel cornerback, where Kyler Gordon has gone on
  injured reserve, I can’t imagine that the pass coverage will be that bad again. It will be a very bad sign if it is.
• Both Biggs and Fishbain rightfully concentrated upon the lack of pass rush. But I think that it’s notable that the Packers have possibly the best offensive line in the league. That was what was being said going into the game and I saw little to indicate that it wasn’t the case.

This is not to give the Bears an excuse here. Their thier defense, especially their pass rush, isn’t good enough and its been the major reason why I’ve been far more pessimistic about the Bears going into this season than most fans ane media members.

I still don’t see the Bears winning more than 6 games this year. But they won’t be as bad as they were on Sunday.

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions:

“I understand that the Bears were probably not feeling great about their offensive line against Green Bay’s front seven but how could that have been [Luke] Getsy’s game plan? You’re at home against your biggest rival on opening day with Aaron Rodgers not in the building. How could the Bears have played it so safe? They barely targeted DJ Moore. No shots downfield. No RPO. Cole Kmet quiet as usual. A maddening number of horizontal throws with no impact. — Jeff G., Palmetto Bay, Fla.

“The biggest surprise to me, and I alluded to it earlier, was that the Bears didn’t try to lean into what they’ve talked about being one of their real strengths — being physical on offense. They weren’t able to create an advantage running the ball against the Packers. They didn’t appear to have designed runs set up for Justin Fields. Maybe they were hoping that physical edge would play out on some of the lateral throws you’re talking about. Matt Eberflus admitted those needed to be blocked much better.

“They’re not going to effectively attack defenses with play-action passing, where they create defined reads for Fields, without getting the ground game rolling. The Packers have a lot of high draft picks in their front seven, and that’s a talented group that has underperformed in recent seasons. The Bears were not effective — across the board — and we’ll see how they react at Tampa Bay. Game plans will be tailored differently each week and the Bears need something that works this week.”

I’d say that the Bears failure on 3rd and 4th and short early in the game was a very bad sign for the offense in terms of getting the running game going.

The Bears signed Nate Davis specifically to help in the running game. His poor performance was disappointing. What made things worse was the necessity of starting Lucas Patrick at center.

The original plan was to have the injured Tevin Jenkins start at guard with Cody Whitehair at center. That’s a pretty good run blocking combination on the inside. With Patrick at center and with Whitehair at guard, the entire interior of the offensive line was considerably weaker. Add in a good, well prepared Packers front and the running game never got going. And that meant that a good part of what should be the core of the Bears offensive plan in most games never got going.

I might add it this doesn’t say great things about the Bears depth on the interior when living with Patrick at center is your best option in this scenario.

In an earlier question, the Biggs mentioned the possibility that the Bears could be looking for help at defensive end, left tackle and quarterback in the draft next year. It wouldn’t necessarily require a very high pick but if the Bears can’t count on Jenkins to be healthy you might have to add guard to that list.

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions:

“I wasn’t expecting more than eight or nine wins, but I was blown away by how bad the Bears looked. Are there any reasons for optimism they can turn things around? I didn’t see any. — @tn5280

“It was a really bad second half for the Bears. No question about that, and there’s nowhere to go but up, right? Yes, it seems like we’ve been saying that for a while. The one thing I would point to is this is a really young roster. Nearly half of the players are in their first or second season, so I would expect natural growth. Will they all take that step forward and emerge as real contributors to successful football? Of course not. But some of these players will develop.

“The coaches will get a better feel for strengths and weaknesses, and you should see improvement. The sting of the loss was made worse because it came against the Packers without Aaron Rodgers. It’s a long season and there appear to be some bad teams on the schedule. You’d classify the Bears as a bad team now, too, but there will be opportunities for success.”

I’ll say that Biggs has a point. But I think on an organizational level, this just doesn’t fly with me.

The Bears have roughly the 10th oldest roster in the NFL. The youngest? The Green Bay Packers.

The Packers have a young team, too. The difference is that they were well prepared to rise to the occasion and to perform in a hostile environment knowing that their quarterback was entering his second NFL start and that they were without their best wide receiver.

The Bears? They laid an egg in a big spot. As has been their habit for a few years now. Think the opener in 2018. Think virtually every Packers game for that matter.

Its the coaches job to get players ready to play on game day. The Bears players didn’t look like they were. This is a bad, bad sign for a coaching staff that oversaw a lot of losing in 2022. Yes, the Bears had a poor roster. But they did little to rise up and overcome that deficiency and arguably they should have won more games.

These performances where the lights are on have become a bad habit for both the team and the organization. They’re indicative of incompetence on a higher level where coaches and the men who hire them aren’t making good decisions. Meanwhile one of the NFL’s best fan bases is told to wait for tomorrow. Over and over and over again.

Offense

• The Bears started the game nicely with some easy throws from Fields and some decent runs. They gradually worked Fields up to longer passes from there.
• The Bears had two shots to make 3rd and 4th and short on the first set of downs. They ran two sneaks from under center and failed. That told me everything I needed to know about the sate of the interior of the offensive line despite efforts to improve it.
• I thought Fields looked good today throwing the ball. He’s got a strong arm and his accuracy is under-rated. It was harder for me to judge his ability to play from the pocket on TV but from my point of view, he ran the ball too much again. What replays we got that showed anything seemed to indicate that he was still missing open receivers. He certainly didn’t appear to be throwing with any anticipation that I could detect.
• Some will claim that Fields spent too much time under pressure and they’d have a point. The blocking up front wasn’t always up to snuff. But Fields still drops back and holds the ball instead of hitting his back foot and throwing it. He could make things a lot easier on that offensive line.
• Fields made a lot of yards on the naked boot last year. The Packers were well coached and looked ready for it.
• It was nice to see Fields take a check down pass early in the game. Fields needs to get comfortable working his way down the field gradually rather than going for a home run every play. Of course, that means that you have to trust the players round you to make plays.
• I like the way that D’Onta Foreman runs. Straight ahead slasher with vision. He’s good. Roschon Johnson took advantage of his chances.
• The Bears were 1 of 11 on third down. I don’t think I need comment further.

Defense

• Green Bay came out and did what you might expect. They decided to run over the Bears defense. From there it transitioned to play action passes. And they did it all pretty well.
• Jordan Love certainly looks to me like he belongs. His passer rating was virtually perfect. There were some throws that weren’t where they needed to be but he could hardly have been better under the circumstances.
• As Greg Olson said during the broadcast, quarterbacks make their money on third down. The Packers had a number of plays where they converted third and long against the Bears defense. The Bears were a very good 9 of 14 on third down.
• Nice job by the Bears defense in the first half when Love tried to draw them off-sides on fourth and three inside the Bears half of the field. The temptation to jump off-sides in those situations must be overwhelming. They held their discipline and didn’t do it.
• Most fans know that the Bears pass rush was poor last year. It appeared to me that they picked up where they left off. The four man rush struggled to make it to Love and he frequently had too much time to throw.
• I thought that it was curious that the Packers passing game was largely designed to put Eddie Jackson in a bind. He was evidently Love’s primary read a great deal of the time and his throws were determined by the direction that Jackson took. That obviously made it easier on him in his first season as a starter.
• Tyreek Stevenson looked like he belonged today.
• There were too many broken coverages today. The defensive backfield was supposed to be the strength of the team. Those things can’t happen.

Miscellaneous

• Greg Olson did a good job today. He brought an extra level of insight that most color men don’t.
• The Bears had too many penalties in the first half but to their credit they cleaned it up after that. They need to sustain that.
• The Bears lost to a team today with a quarterback who was starting his first full season and without their best wide receiver. And it was the same old story.

  I laugh when I think of all of those Bears fans and media pundits who thought that that this was going to be a different era because Aaron Rogers left. You know what has been happening for the last 30 years? The Packers have consistently risen to the occasion year after year. And the Bears haven’t.